View Preprint

1 Reconstructing Ireland’s marine fisheries catches: 1950-2010 2 3 Dana D. Miller*1 and Dirk Zeller2 4 5 1Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 6 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z4 7 8 2Sea Around Us Project, Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, 2202 Main Mall, 9 Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6T 1Z4 10 11 *To whom correspondence should be addressed: Tel: +1 604 341 6339. E-mail: 12 [email protected] s 13 t n i 14 r P 15 ABSTRACT The wasteful practice of discarding catch is one of the major problems e r P 16 associated with European fisheries. Despite this, estimates of discarded catch are not included 17 in the ‘Official Catch Statistics’ database (1905 to present) collected and maintained by the 18 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). Furthermore, removals through 19 recreational sea angling and estimates of other forms of unreported landings are often also 20 missing from this dataset. Here, total discarded catch and unreported landings made by Irish 21 commercial fishing vessels, and the total amount of fish caught and retained through Irish sea 22 angling activities within the Northeast Atlantic from 1950 to 2010 have been estimated. Total 23 reconstructed catches were 19.3% and 20.9% higher than the officially recorded total 24 landings as reported by ICES from the Northeast Atlantic, and those estimated as being from 25 within the Irish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), respectively. Discarded catch was 26 proportionately the largest component of the reconstruction, representing 12.7% of the total 27 catch within the Irish EEZ. The Irish catch reconstruction presented here is by no means 28 assumed to represent the complete record of total removals and the authors encourage further 29 efforts to improve upon this attempt. However, considering the current absence of estimated 30 values for discarded catch, recreational removals and other unreported landings from 1 PeerJ PrePrints | https://peerj.com/preprints/150v1/ | v1 received: 11 Dec 2013, published: 11 Dec 2013, doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.150v1 31 officially and publically reported data, we feel that our reconstruction provides an improved 32 baseline estimate of more accurate total Irish marine fisheries catch that has not previously 33 been made publically available. 34 35 Keywords: Irish fisheries, Discarding, IUU fishing, Recreational catches 36 s t n i r P e r P 2 PeerJ PrePrints | https://peerj.com/preprints/150v1/ | v1 received: 11 Dec 2013, published: 11 Dec 2013, doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.150v1 37 INTRODUCTION 38 39 The waters surrounding Ireland are diverse and productive, containing important spawning 40 grounds and nursery areas for many different species of fish (Marine Institute, 2009). For 41 centuries, these waters have supported fisheries targeted by Irish and other European fishing 42 fleets including those from Spain, France, Belgium and the UK (McArthur, 1959; de Courcy 43 Ireland, 1981; Molloy, 2004). Historically, the most important species contributing to total 44 marine fish landings by weight have been pelagic species such as Atlantic mackerel (Scomber s t n 45 scombrus), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) and more recently, Atlantic horse mackerel i r P 46 (Trachurus trachurus) and blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou). Nephrops (Nephrops e r 47 norvegicus) and demersal species such as whiting (Merlangius merlangus), Atlantic cod P 48 (Gadus morhua), haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus) and European plaice (Pleuronectes 49 platessa) have also notably contributed to total marine fisheries landings, while shellfish such 50 as European lobster (Homarus gammarus) and crab (Cancer spp.) have been of particular 51 significance to the inshore fisheries sector, serving as an important resource base for Irish 52 coastal communities (Marine Institute, 2009; Marine Institute, 2011a; ICES, 2011). 53 Ireland’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is located within FAO Fishing Area 27 54 (Figure 1). The waters of the Northeast Atlantic have been segregated into a series of 55 divisions and sub-divisions, used for geo-referencing fisheries management areas by the 56 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). ICES provides scientific advice 57 in relation to fisheries management both to the Irish government and to the European 58 Commission (EC). The Irish EEZ is contained entirely within ICES Sub-areas VI and VII, 59 however ICES Sub-areas VI and VII extend beyond the Irish EEZ, into the high seas or the 60 EEZs of neighbouring countries. 61 3 PeerJ PrePrints | https://peerj.com/preprints/150v1/ | v1 received: 11 Dec 2013, published: 11 Dec 2013, doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.150v1 s t n i r P e r P 62 63 Figure 1 The Irish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the ICES Divisions around the Irish 64 Coast. Image generated by the Sea Around Us Project, courtesy of Christopher Hoornaert. 65 66 67 Fish caught within all EU EEZs are managed as a common resource, shared between 68 the Member States that have commercial interests in these stocks (EC, 2009a). The EU’s 69 Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) governs European fisheries within all Member State EEZs 70 through Total Allowable Catches (TACs), which are partitioned into stock quotas among 71 countries, and a complex system of technical measures including minimum landing sizes, 4 PeerJ PrePrints | https://peerj.com/preprints/150v1/ | v1 received: 11 Dec 2013, published: 11 Dec 2013, doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.150v1 72 area closures and gear restrictions (EC, 2009a). The CFP has been criticised for failing to 73 achieve social, economic or environmental sustainability within the European fishing 74 industry since its establishment in 1983 (EC, 2009b; Khalilian et al., 2010; EC, 2011). The 75 many problems associated with the CFP have included high levels of discarding and high- 76 grading (Borges et al., 2005; Marine Institute, 2011b), failure to follow scientific advice and 77 fleet overcapacity that has been maintained through government subsidies (EC, 2009b; 78 Khalilian et al., 2010; EC, 2011; Österblom et al., 2011). 79 Presently, of the commercial fish stocks where Ireland has a share of the TAC, 13 out s t n 80 of 38 (i.e., 34%) for which sufficient scientific data exist to estimate stock status, are being i r P 81 overfished relative to Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) (Marine Institute, 2012). In e r 82 addition, a number of stocks which were once the main focus of important targeted fisheries P 83 are now considered depleted or collapsed (Marine Institute, 2009; Marine Institute, 2012). 84 For 30 out of 59 stocks (i.e., 50.8%), there is insufficient scientific data for estimating stock 85 status relative to MSY and this is a major factor contributing to the uncertainty of scientific 86 advice (Marine Institute, 2012). Limited data on discards and unreported landings have also 87 been responsible for the uncertainty of stock assessments (Marine Institute, 2012). ICES 88 scientists have acknowledged that for a number of stocks, management by TAC is 89 inappropriate because only the landings are controlled, and these quantities are not 90 representative of total catches (Marine Institute, 2012). 91 ICES provides scientific advice on fisheries stocks within the Northeast Atlantic 92 based on data submitted to ICES as part of the EU’s Data Collection Framework (DCF) and 93 under a number of international monitoring programmes (ICES, 2012). Estimates of 94 discarded and unreported catch (recorded as ‘unallocated’) for a limited number of stocks 95 have been considered in recent years by ICES scientists when producing and issuing 96 scientific advice. When provided in publically accessible reports, however, these data are 5 PeerJ PrePrints | https://peerj.com/preprints/150v1/ | v1 received: 11 Dec 2013, published: 11 Dec 2013, doi: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.150v1 97 only represented by one annual value for each stock, without any information given on which 98 countries provided these values, and thus for which fishing fleets the estimated discarding or 99 unreported catch rates apply. Furthermore, the ‘Official Catch Statistics’ database accessible 100 online and maintained by ICES, only contains nationally reported annual quantities of 101 commercially landed fish. Records contained within this dataset do not include annual 102 estimates of discarded, recreational and other unreported catches. 103 Irish fisheries landing statistics are currently reported to ICES by the Irish Sea 104 Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA). Included within these statistics are the officially s t n 105 recorded landings made by Irish commercial fishing vessels measuring ten meters or more, i r P 106 reported by ICES sub-area and for the most part to species level. Vessels measuring less than e r 107 ten meters are not required to carry logbooks and landings that are made by these vessels are P 108 not directly monitored or reported but instead are estimated through the examination of sales 109 notes, which are required for all first point of sale transactions where over ten kilograms of 110 fish are sold (INTERREG, 2001; Marine Institute, 2007; C. O Shea, pers. comm., SFPA). 111 Long-term datasets of fisheries landings can provide some insights into temporal 112 trends in marine resource use (e.g., Pooley, 1993; Pauly et al., 1998; Pinnegar et al., 2003; 113 Miller et al., 2012). However, fisheries ‘landings’ typically do not represent total fisheries 114 ‘catches’ and thus trends in landings data do not necessarily provide an accurate indication of 115 the potential ecological impacts of fishing activities in a particular marine area (Zeller et al., 116 2009). In addition, stock-specific landings statistics may not provide adequate information for 117 the purposes of fisheries stock assessment (Marine Institute, 2011a). Long-term fisheries 118 ‘catch’ datasets which incorporate reconstructed estimates of all fisheries removals can 119 provide opportunities for improved interpretations of fisheries trends and cumulative 120 potential impacts that fishing activities may be having on particular stocks or ecosystems 121 (Zeller et al., 2007; Zeller et al., 2011).

Load more